Joyner v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
BELSON, Associate Judge:
The Department of Employment Services (DOES) determined that petitioner Ann 0. Joyner is no longer disabled for purposes of collecting workers’ compensation benefits because, under its interpretation of D.C.Code § 36-308(c) (1981), she had voluntarily limited her income or failed to accept employment commensurate with her abilities. Petitioner challenges DOES’ application of § 36-308(c) to her circumstances. Since we find the agency’s interpretation of D.C.Code § 36-308(c) reasonable and in accordance with law, and hold that the agency order is supported by substantial…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
- National Labor Relations Board v. Bell Aerospace Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Federal Power CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1974
- Hughes v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1985
- Thomas v. District of Columbia Department of LaborDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Tim Neal v. Annett Holdings, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2012
- Elwood L. See v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of LaborCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1994
- Washington Post v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- King v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1989
- Georgetown University v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.